Shared decision making (SDM) was introduced in hospital Lillebelt in 2019 and research reports that patients are more satisfied with their treatment, if they play an active role in choosing treatment. A Decision-Helper was constructed and introduced in the treatment for Colles fractures. This study aimed to understand how patients experience shared decision-making (SDM) for an acute illness, and how it affects them when making decisions about the treatment of their distal radius fracture. An exploratory, qualitative study design was performed to understand the patient's experience, during the choice of treatment with SDM. 12 were recruited when they came to their first follow-up 5 days after the injury, in the outpatient clinic. 10 were interviewed; 3 face to face and 7 by telephone. All women aged 57-87 years and all had a displaced Colles fracture, which had been reduced in the Emergency Room.Introduction
Method
With a strong political agenda for change towards patient-centred healthcare, the notion of shared decision-making is reported to substantially improve patient experience, adherence to treatment and health outcomes. In clinical practice however, observational studies have shown shared decision-making is rarely implemented and patient preferences are seldom met. The aim of this study was to measure the extent of shared decision-making in clinical encounters involving physiotherapists and patients with low back pain. Eighty outpatient encounters (from 12 clinicians) were observed, audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using the OPTION instrument. This measures 12 decision-making items, rated on a scale 0–4, which are summated and scaled to give a percentage: The higher the score, the greater the shared decision-making competency. The mean OPTION score was 24.0% (range 10.4%–43.8%). Providing patients with a list of treatment options was the only behaviour exhibited by every clinician, however in 73.8%, this was not demonstrated beyond a perfunctory level. Failure to offer the choice of doing nothing, or deferring the decision precluded clinicians from attaining a higher OPTION score.Purpose of the Study and Background
Methods and Results
Dissatisfaction rates after TKA are reported to be between 15 – 25%, with unmet outcome expectations being a key contributor. Shared decision making tools (SDMT) are designed to align a patient's and surgeon's expectations. This study demonstrates clinical validation of a patient specific shared decision making tool. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected in 150 patients in a pre-consultation environment of one surgeon. The data was processed into a probabilistic predictive model utilising prior data to generate a preoperative baseline and an expected outcome after TKA. The surgeon was blinded to the prediction algorithm for the first 75 patients and exposed for the following 75 patients. PROMs collected were the knee injury and osteoarthritis outcome score (KOOS) and questions on lower back pain, hip pain and falls. The patients booked and not booked before and after exposure to the prediction were collected. The clinical validation involved 27 patients who had their outcome predicted and had their PROMs captured at 12 months after TKA. The predicted change in severity of pain and the patients actual change from pre-op to 12 month post operative KOOS pain was analysed using a Spearman's Rho correlation. Further analysis was performed by dividing the group into those predicted by the model to have improved by more than 10 percentile points and those who were predicted to improve by less than 10 percentile points.Introduction
Methods
To develop prediction models using machine-learning (ML) algorithms for 90-day and one-year mortality prediction in femoral neck fracture (FNF) patients aged 50 years or older based on the Hip fracture Evaluation with Alternatives of Total Hip arthroplasty versus Hemiarthroplasty (HEALTH) and Fixation using Alternative Implants for the Treatment of Hip fractures (FAITH) trials. This study included 2,388 patients from the HEALTH and FAITH trials, with 90-day and one-year mortality proportions of 3.0% (71/2,388) and 6.4% (153/2,388), respectively. The mean age was 75.9 years (SD 10.8) and 65.9% of patients (1,574/2,388) were female. The algorithms included patient and injury characteristics. Six algorithms were developed, internally validated and evaluated across discrimination (c-statistic; discriminative ability between those with risk of mortality and those without), calibration (observed outcome compared to the predicted probability), and the Brier score (composite of discrimination and calibration).Aims
Methods
Giant cell tumour of bone (GCTB) treatment changed since the introduction of denosumab from purely surgical towards a multidisciplinary approach, with recent concerns of higher recurrence rates after denosumab. We evaluated oncological, surgical, and functional outcomes for distal radius GCTB, with a critically appraised systematic literature review. We included 76 patients with distal radius GCTB in three sarcoma centres (1990 to 2019). Median follow-up was 8.8 years (2 to 23). Seven patients underwent curettage, 38 curettage with adjuvants, and 31 resection; 20 had denosumab.Aims
Methods
Cell therapies hold significant promise for the treatment of injured or diseased musculoskeletal tissues. However, despite advances in research, there is growing concern about the increasing number of clinical centres around the world that are making unwarranted claims or are performing risky biological procedures. Such providers have been known to recommend, prescribe, or deliver so called ‘stem cell’ preparations without sufficient data to support their true content and efficacy. In this annotation, we outline the current environment of stem cell-based treatments and the strategies of marketing directly to consumers. We also outline the difficulties in the regulation of these clinics and make recommendations for best practice and the identification and reporting of illegitimate providers. Cite this article:
